Liberal democrats

If Nick Clegg has decided that he won’t run for re-election, what are the implications? Today’s Daily Mail serializes a book by Jasper Gerard about the party, where he claims Clegg told his wife Miriam that he’ll only do one term as Deputy Prime Minister. That makes sense. The Lib Dems will want to separate from the Tories before the next election, and that’ll probably mean choosing a new leader who can more plausibly attack Tories during the campaign. Clegg will doubtless have post-Downing Street job offers involving various forms of European statesmanship, a political afterlife where he can speak Spanish from podiums without being given funny looks. Given that the

The Institute for Fiscal Studies enjoys quasi-divine status in Westminster: chancellors and their shadows bother it for its blessing, and Budget Day is never complete until its judgment has been passed. Both parties have bent a suppliant knee before the institute in the past, but the IFS became particularly important to Labour after it declared last autumn that George Osborne’s policies to be ‘regressive‘. This is why the IFS report on the tax system, released today, is important. The review, conducted by Sir James Mirrlees, is a damning indictment on tax system that has fallen from 5th to 95th in the World Economic Forum’s tax competitiveness rankings. Mirrlees’ findings have far

It’s the moment of the truth for Britain’s banking sector: the publication of the Vickers report. The headline is as expected: the Commission recommends the imposition of a ringfence on banks’ ‘core operations’ (such as consumer deposits and small business lending) from the riskier elements of their business. According to the FT (£), the banks will have discretion over where the ringfence will fall, giving lenders and users a degree of flexibility, which suggests that Vickers is not recommending the full separation of retail and investment banking, as some had hoped. Vickers also proposes that banks reserve 10 per cent of the capital in their ringfenced operations to guard against future crises, which is expected to

How long will Alex Salmond’s honeymoon with the voters of Scotland continue? Given that his next mission is to hold and win an independence referendum, much depends on his popularity and that of his party. Today, a third opinion poll puts support for the Scottish National Party at just under half of the national electorate. Angus Reid, polling for the Sunday Express, puts support for the SNP has now hit a remarkable 49 per cent. Given that the Nationalists only won 45 per cent of the votes in May’s election – enough to sweep all the unionist parties into the background – this new high just shy of 50 per

William Hague’s comments in an interview with The Times that the Liberal Democrats are restraining the Tories on Europe will increase the grumbling among Tory backbenchers about the power of the junior coalition partner. Hague tells the paper that ‘A point of difference in our manifesto was the aim to repatriate some powers. Clearly that’s something I’m in favour of, but that’s the area we had to compromise on in return for other compromises.’ (In many ways this is a statement of the obvious. But in the current uncertain European environment, his remarks are news). In an attempt to reassure euro-sceptics, Foreign Secretary stresses that the Conservative party ‘would like

I understand that following a meeting in Downing Street this morning, Eric Pickles, the Communities and Local Government Secretary, has been put in charge of dealing with Britain’s 120,000 “problem families”. In the aftermath of the riots, David Cameron promised to put all of these families through some a family-intervention programme by the time of the next election. This policy, though, was bogged down in the bureaucracy as it cut across so many different departments. Pickles’ department will now have sole responsibility for this commitment. It will receive extra budget, with the money coming from education and work and pensions, and staff to deal with this. As I revealed in

Banking reform has always been one of those issues that was going to test the unity of the coalition. Indeed, it was the subject of the very first inter-coalition wrangle when back in May 2010 George Osborne and Vince Cable tussled over who would chair the Cabinet committee on banking reform.   To date, these differences have been held in check by the fact that the coalition is waiting for the recommendations of the John Vickers-led Independent Commission on Banking. But with the final draft of the Vickers Report being published on 12 September, these splits are starting to open up again.   Cable and the Liberal Democrats would like,

There’s a big coalition split coming down the road. Next month the Vickers’ review into banking reform, which is going to suggest a ring-fencing of the investment and retail arms of banks, will come out. The Liberal Democrats — led by Vince Cable — will push for the instant implementation of the report’s recommendations. The Treasury will argue that banks need to be given time to introduce these new rules. The result will be, as one senior Lib Dem source tells this morning’s FT, ‘a big fight’.   The tricky question for Cameron and Osborne is how do they win this argument when there’s a visceral desire for tough measures

Traditionally the fact that the Liberal Democrats hold their conference first and still vote on party policy at it has been regarded as a disadvantage. But this year, I suspect that these two things will be in their favour. By going first, they will get to set the terms of debate for conference season. They’ll be able to spike their coalition partners’ guns on a whole variety of post-riots issues. They can make clear that they won’t accept any changes to the human rights act or any government push to encourage marriage. Even better, they can pass motions to this effect. They also will have first crack at setting out

The future of the 50 per cent tax rate is growing issue within the coalition. Unlike most government wrangles, this one doesn’t split on partisan lines, with the yellows on one hand and the blues on the other. The debate is largely being forged by personalities. George Osborne is well entrenched; Eric Pickles weighed-in for the race last weekend, saying that he wanted people “to keep more money in their pockets”, indicating that he hopes the rate is temporary. (He went take a swipe at Vince Cable’s mansions tax, which he described as a “big mistake”.)   It’s David Willetts’ turn this weekend. The Times reports (£) that Willetts believes

Nick Clegg laughed-off the dousing of blue paint he received in Glasgow yesterday, like one of Noel Edmonds’ unwitting victims. Today, Clegg has turned into the grinning douser: drenching his coalition partners in yellow paint by saying that the European Convention on Human Rights will not be watered down. Writing in the Guardian, Clegg says that the Conservatives are right to seek operational reform of the European Court of Human Rights, but the common ground ends there. He says that “the Human Rights Act and the European convention on human rights have been instrumental” in preventing injustices from council snooping to the misuse of DNA records and that the incorporation

First came the Germans and then came the Brits. The UK Treasury has secured an agreement with authorities in Zurich to tax the assets of UK citizens held in Swiss banks to reduce on tax avoidance and stamp out evasion. The deal will follow the lines of that which Switzerland made with Germany last month. The FT has details: ‘Taxes on future income will be withheld at a rate of 48 per cent, corresponding to the top 50 per cent rate that now applies to Britain’s highest earners. A one-off levy of between 19 and 34 per cent will be applied to all Swiss accounts held by UK residents, with the